2004 (6) TMI 285 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal Partially Supports Assessee: Rejects Interest Adjustment and Additional Tax, Upholds Levy u/s 234B.

INSILCO LTD. Versus JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX.

The Tribunal partially allowed the assessee's appeal, ruling against the adjustment of interest paid to the IT Department under s. 115JA and the ... Interest paid to IT Department in computing book profit u/s 115JA - adjustment made by the AO u/s 143(1)(a) - HELD THAT:- No adjustment is required to be made u/s 115JA in respect of any interest paid or payable debited to the P&L a/c in order to compute book profit though the expense is not allowed as deduction while calculating/determining taxable income, with reference to s. 40(a)(ii) of the IT Act. The Kerala High Court in Fertilisers & Chemicals Travancore Ltd.[2002 (10) TMI 39 - KERALA HIGH COURT] has observed that Expln. (a) of s. 115JA of the Act mentions only the amount of income-tax paid or payable. That does not include interest. Insofar as interest on income-tax is not mentioned in this section, this cannot be added under s. 115JA of the Act. It, therefore, came to the conclusion that the addition of interest on income tax cannot be made. However, in the impugned order, the learned CIT(A) relied on the decision of Bharat Commerce & Industries Ltd.[1984 (9) TMI 46 - DELHI HIGH COURT] which was in the context of deduction as an expenditure for the purpose of earning any income or profit but not about the deemed income under s. 115JA, which provision has to be construed strictly. In that view of the matter, the learned CIT(A) is found to have committed an error. Having regard to the decision of Kerala High Court in Fertilisers & Chemicals Travancore Ltd., the action to increase the profit by the amount of interest paid to the IT Department while determining book profit cannot be upheld. Accordingly, ground of the assessee stands allowed. Since the charging of additional tax u/s 143(1)(a) would be consequential, this ground along with ground Nos. 1 & 2 stands allowed. Issues involved:The judgment involves the following Issues:1. Adjustment of interest paid to IT Department in computing book profit under s. 115JA of the IT Act.2. Legality of adjustment made by the AO under s. 143(1)(a) of the IT Act.3. Levy of additional tax under s. 143(1A) of the IT Act.4. Levy of interest under s. 234B of the IT Act.Issue 1: Adjustment of interest paid to IT Department:The AO adjusted the interest paid to the IT Department in computing book profit under s. 115JA of the IT Act. The CIT(A) upheld this adjustment, citing precedents that treated interest under various provisions of the IT Act as part of tax. However, the assessee contended that interest on income-tax was not mentioned in s. 115JA for determining book profit. The Kerala High Court supported this view, stating that interest on income-tax cannot be added under s. 115JA. The Tribunal agreed with the assessee, holding that no adjustment is required for interest paid or payable under s. 115JA to compute book profit.Issue 2: Legality of adjustment by the AO:The AO made adjustments under s. 143(1)(a) of the IT Act, which the CIT(A) approved. The assessee argued that such adjustments were beyond the AO's powers and any additional tax levied could not be charged. The Tribunal found in favor of the assessee, stating that no adjustment is needed under s. 115JA for interest paid to the IT Department. Consequently, the grounds of the assessee were allowed.Issue 3: Levy of additional tax under s. 143(1A):The CIT(A) upheld the levy of additional tax under s. 143(1A) of the IT Act. However, as the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee regarding the adjustment of interest paid to the IT Department, the grounds of the assessee were allowed, including the challenge against the additional tax.Issue 4: Levy of interest under s. 234B:The Tribunal addressed the levy of interest under s. 234B of the IT Act. Various High Courts have held that the provisions of payment of advance tax apply to deemed income under s. 115JA. Therefore, the Tribunal found no merit in the assessee's challenge against the levy of interest under s. 234B. The AO was directed to allow consequential relief in this regard.In conclusion, the Tribunal partly allowed the assessee's appeal, ruling in favor of the assessee on the adjustment of interest paid to the IT Department under s. 115JA and the consequential additional tax under s. 143(1A), while upholding the levy of interest under s. 234B based on precedents from various High Courts.